DCIT, CC-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMICUS REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

153A proceedings. (ii). That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting addition of Rs. 1,92,00,000/- has erred to totally ignore that assessee failed to discharge its onus to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction, in respect of unsecured loan received. (iii). That on the facts and circumstances

MALIKA ROY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

section 153A could be enhanced to include re-computation of long-term capital gain qua those assessments, which are unabated

SAMIT RAY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

section 153A could be enhanced to include re-computation of long-term capital gain qua those assessments, which are unabated

ARATI RAY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. -3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

section 153A could be enhanced to include re-computation of long-term capital gain qua those assessments, which are unabated

SRI SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 398/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Surya Prakash Bagla -Vs- Dcit, Central Circle-Vii, Kolkata [Pan: Aebpb 4558 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 02.07.2013 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in upholding the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act in the facts and circumstances

DCIT, CC - I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUNITA KHEMKA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The only issue to be decided in these appeals are that whether the assessee is eligible to claim long term capital gains

SMT. NITA SETHIA ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2012-13 Smt. Nita Sethia V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 5, Janki Shah Road, 1St 3(3), 110, Shanti Pally, Floor, Hastings, Aayakar Bhavan, Kolkata-700022 Poorva, E.M. Bye Pass, [Pan No.Ajwps 8335 H] Nr. Ruby Hospital, Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 12-11-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 30-11-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.08.2018 Passed In Case No.930/Acit,Cc-3(3)/Cit(A)-21/Kol/2015-16, Involving Proceedings U/S 153A R.W.S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee Raises Two Substantive Grounds In Her Instant Appeal. Her Former Legal Grievance Challenges Validity Of Sec. 153A Proceedings In Absence Of Any Incriminating Material Found Or Seized During The Course Of Search. This Follows Her Latter Substantive Ground On Merits That The Assessing Officer & The Cit(A) Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating Long

Capital Gains (LTCG) in question of ₹61,62,460/- from sale of shares in M/s Dignity Suppliers P Ltd. as bogus giving rise to sec. 68 addition in issue. 3. This assessee is assessed as an individual. She filed her regular return on 30.07.2012. The same stood summarily processed. There can hardly be any dispute that the last date

ROHIT JALAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Capital Gains claim of the assessee in respect of sale of scrip of M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. as exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act which was held by AO to be bogus and that action of AO was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on appeal of the assessee. Therefore this appeal of assessee before this Tribunal

KUSUMLATA SONTHALIA ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL - 1, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1151/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

Capital Gains on sale of shares and offices as per details, consequent to entering into agreement with Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited for purchase of Flat at Gurgoan in terms of agreement dated 09.03.2009. Supporting documents for flat at Gurgoan is enclosed herewith and marked as per Annexure-E. Supporting calculations for exemption under section

SRI SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narsimha Chary, Jm]

153A of the Act thereon and for the Asst Year 2009-10, being the year of search, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. The assessee’s appeal is mainly containing the validity of the search and the grounds of appeal in all the years can be summarized as follows : 1. For that in view of the facts

DCIT,CC-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narsimha Chary, Jm]

153A of the Act thereon and for the Asst Year 2009-10, being the year of search, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. The assessee’s appeal is mainly containing the validity of the search and the grounds of appeal in all the years can be summarized as follows : 1. For that in view of the facts

SRI SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narsimha Chary, Jm]

153A of the Act thereon and for the Asst Year 2009-10, being the year of search, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. The assessee’s appeal is mainly containing the validity of the search and the grounds of appeal in all the years can be summarized as follows : 1. For that in view of the facts

SHRI JYOTI MOHAN MALL,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOL - XV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narsimha Charyassessment Year:2003-04

capital gain and other sources for the year under consideration. A search & seizure operation was conducted on 30-06-2003 ITA No.819/Kol/2010 A.Y. 2003-04 Sh. Jyoti Mohan Mall vs. CIT, XV, Kol. Page 2 and on subsequent date on the MALL GROUP of cases. The assessee is a member of the group. During the period of search certain documents

SHREE RAM ELECTROCAST PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XVI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

Capital gains" and" Income from other sources"] or a company the principal business of which is the business of banking or the granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies, such company shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business to the extent

DCIT,CC-XVI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHREE RAM ELECTROCAST PVT.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

Capital gains" and" Income from other sources"] or a company the principal business of which is the business of banking or the granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies, such company shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business to the extent

SHRI RAGHVENDRA MOHTA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

gain from sale of shares of Ashika Credit Capital Ltd. of Rs.29,73,500/- for sale of Rs.42,27,500/- which has been claimed as exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act. Several other disallowance/additions were made towards bogus interest u/s. 69C, interest expenditure attributable to negative capital, u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D and on account of dividend stripping

LALJI & SONS,BANKURA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - BANKURA, BANKURA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Capital Gains on his part. Thus spirit of issue of notice u/s 143(2) is served. In this regard it would not be out of place to reproduce the text of section 292B, which reads as under:- " Section 292B : No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAVI MODI, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

153A was issued and asking from the assessee to file return for AY 2018-19. In response to the same, the return of income was filed declaring total income of RS. 19,52,49,060/-. The return filed was selected for scrutiny by issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The assessee submitted its response. The AO after calling

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAVI MODI, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

153A was issued and asking from the assessee to file return for AY 2018-19. In response to the same, the return of income was filed declaring total income of RS. 19,52,49,060/-. The return filed was selected for scrutiny by issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The assessee submitted its response. The AO after calling